human12 (human12) wrote in rsqubf,

Practice and theological argument

I was in a seminar where I heard a nonsense from a scientist who has a PhD in biology. She claimed that man came from monkey. As a ‘scientific’ evidence, she used the similarity between a monkey DNA and a human DNA. She claimed that they are 99% ‘similar’. So she concluded that they must be ‘related’. How can one conclude ‘relationship’ out of ‘similarity’? When I asked her the question, she said that the ‘similarity’ was based on ‘statistical significance’. Well, but the fundamental question still remains: how can we draw ‘logical relationship’ or ‘logical necessity’ out of ‘statistical significance’? Why should I believe ‘statistical significance’ more than the existence of God? It was very frustrating to have discussion with a ‘scientist’ who is completely blinded by a ‘scientific’ dogma without any critical ability to distinguish ‘logical necessity’ from ‘statistical significance’. Her blind devotion to the ‘statistical significance’ reminded me of all those sincere UBF members. It was like talking to a UBF shepherd who is blindly devoted to the beautiful spiritual legacy of Dr. Samuel Lee. How ridiculous it is to conduct a ‘scientific’ research with no critical evaluation of one’s own scientific belief system! So I visited the website of UBF world headquarters to get some spiritual insight by reading the world class UBF messages. But guess what I found:

“Dr. Samuel Lee often said that putting one word of God into practice was more valuable than knowing ten thousand theological arguments. Jesus helped this man to practice one thing.”

This is another nonsense!!
  • Post a new comment


    Comments allowed for members only

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded